Replaying the classic Ace Attorney games in hopes of refining my writing skills, and because I miss them a lot. I just finished replaying Turnabout Sisters, so have some overanalysis of Mia, with bonus Maya.

It seems with every replay of the game, I walk away with a different impression of the second case’s Mia Ex Machina. At first I was completely sour to it, then I sort of admired that Mia was allowed to deal the big, final blow to her murderer, and now I think it provides some really interesting insight into how Mia’s character works.

For one thing, I forgot that it wasn’t concrete evidence that won the trial, but the act of Mia breaking down and threatening her opponent with his weakest point until he confesses.

Given the events of the third game and the brutal smack-down she gives Dahlia in the final case, this deus ex machina..ends up becoming more interesting than was likely intended. Actually, a lot of things end up more interesting when you take into consideration that Mia isn’t just a supporting mentor and loving sister, but also someone capable of being crafty and showing absolutely no mercy to her opponents (or at least to the ones who explicitly deserve it). The “rub the evidence in their face” advice she gives you in the first case, for example, suddenly becomes extra telling of what sort of lawyer—and person—she grew up to be; even though what occurs in the third game (or a third game at all) wasn’t in the minds of the developers at the production of the first game, I like to think that between the tracking down of the man responsible for her mother’s disappearance, and her first case with Dahlia, she was given a sharper, rougher edge. I maintain the belief that she doesn’t outright crush her opponent unless it concerns someone who hurt her family, but it wouldn’t surprise me if she dealt some heavy hits throughout her past cases.

Mia’s a fun character to study because her character isn’t fleshed out as apparently as Maya or Edgeworth’s, which makes every detail, no matter how small, every bit significant when it comes to piecing together the puzzle that makes her character. I received an ask years ago on what my thoughts on Mia were, and while I went into rambling analysis (much like you see here), I acknowledged, and still acknowledge, that some of the strange open-endedness of her character is more likely the result of fumbling writing than it is something intentional and calculated. But I also stand by my previous position that I’d rather make something of it than simply handwave it as poor writing.

Other thoughts! I thought Maya’s glimmering admiration of Edgeworth didn’t come until the third case, so it was cute to see her speaking so highly of a man intent on sending her to death row. And I’ve really missed her and her impish ways.